6 replies to this topic

[m.oreilly]

http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/25/561

Quote

So the big change during 2.6.21 is all the timer changes to support a
tickless system (and even with ticks, more varied time sources). Thanks
(when it no longer broke for lots of people go to Thomas Gleixner and
Ingo Molnar and a cadre of testers and coders.

Of course, the timer stuff was just the most painful and core part (and
thus the one that I remember most): there's a lot of changes all over. The
appended changelog is just for the fixes since -rc7, so that doesn't look
very impressive, the full changes since 2.6.20 are obviously a *lot*
bigger (and you're better off reading the individual -rc changelogs).

We now return you to your regular scheduler discussions,

Linus

[viper666]

no tick ,they claim it will run cooler and use less power with no tics.I saw some test some where and it looked like it did reduce power. Im pretty sure the no tic in that kernel is only on the 32bit kernel and it has not been add to the 64bit one yet.

The best thing about 2.6.20 is on AMD with Numa memory access like opteron it,forces the access to local node,which really improves the latency.They claimed that Vista was gonna do this but in vista theres no way to check and see,so they can say whatever they want. numastat is the linux command showing all memory accesses and if they are local or not.

2.6-21 is only in beta distros for now,or to compile your self,they tend not to add them to distro's till they are stable with the new features.There is a brand new kernel every couple months.

Most Disros now are running 2.6-18 to 2.6-20.

[WFO]

viper666, on Apr 29 2007, 04:41 AM, said:

Most Disros now are running 2.6-18 to 2.6-20.

And that would be me with the latest Feisty on all my rigs. I'll watch for the next beta as the alphas were dodgy. From a Doz user standpoint Suse has gone downhill since 10.0. My opinion only.

Bro!

[USM]

WFO, on Apr 29 2007, 08:53 PM, said:

And that would be me with the latest Feisty on all my rigs. I'll watch for the next beta as the alphas were dodgy. From a Doz user standpoint Suse has gone downhill since 10.0. My opinion only.

Bro!

Agreed I went back to Ubuntu 6.10 because I dont have enough RAM for SuSe 10.2. SuSe runs the SMP much faster IMO.

[WFO]

USM, on May 5 2007, 06:55 PM, said:

Agreed I went back to Ubuntu 6.10 because I dont have enough RAM for SuSe 10.2. SuSe runs the SMP much faster IMO.

10.2 had slightly quicker frame times for folding, about 7-10 seconds. For me Ubuntu is just much easier to use. Speaking from a Windows user Linux illiterate standpoint... especially on install.

[USM]

WFO, on May 7 2007, 10:55 PM, said:

10.2 had slightly quicker frame times for folding, about 7-10 seconds. For me Ubuntu is just much easier to use. Speaking from a Windows user Linux illiterate standpoint... especially on install.

Agreed and as I told you in my PM I got 7.04 running smooth. But I still say SuSe has more power Captian!!!

[m.oreilly]

USM, on May 8 2007, 12:23 AM, said:

Agreed and as I told you in my PM I got 7.04 running smooth. But I still say SuSe has more power Captian!!!

suse is the ticket. if my audio ran, suse would be the distro for me. imho, suse is the most stable desktop linux release. please, let the c-media 8788 chip be recognized